Volenti Non-Fit Injuria
The literal meaning of this maxim is that an act to which man consents cannot be complained off as an injury. In other words, if you consent to an act, you are not eligible to complain but suffer the consequences of your own consent. It is assumed that consent shall be obtained freely and not caused by undue influence, coercion, etc. The consent may be express or implied. What is consented to is not an injury. According to Salmond, no man can enforce a right which he has voluntarily waived or abandoned. Every man is a judge of his own interest. If he voluntarily takes risks or consents harm then he cannot take action for it. Example if a spectator to any sport event is injured during the match without the negligence or wrongful intention of the player or defendant, in that situation the plaintiff cannot be held liable as the plaintiff had consented to the risk of the sport event by purchasing the tickets of the event. However, if there is negligence or wrongful intention present then the plaintiff can claim remedy under the law of torts.
Hall v. Brookland Auto racing club 1932 ALL ER 208 The plaintiff was a spectator at the defendants race club. During the car race, there was collision between two cars as a result one of the car was thrown into the spectator’s enclosure and injured the plaintiff. It was held that the plaintiff impliedly took the risk of such injury the danger being inherent in the sport, and therefore the defendants were not held liable.
For application of this maxim the following conditions must be fulfilled,
- Consent must be freely given.
- The act must not be unlawful.
- Knowledge does not necessarily imply consent. (Scienti non fit injuria)
In Smith v. Baker-the plaintiff was employed in the defendants stone quarry. He worked there with the full knowledge of the fact that he was exposed to danger by the negligent practice of the defendant in swinging the stones over the quarry and the workers head by means of a crane. The plaintiff got injured as the result off all of a stone. In a suit filed by the plaintiff, the defendant was held to be liable and the plaintiff was entitled to claim damages. The court pointed out the fact that the knowledge of the risk is not the same as acceptance.
In Yarmoth v. France, the court held that mere knowledge of the impending danger does not amount to consent. SCIENTI NON-FIT INJURIA.
Exceptions: Rescue Cases.
- Rescue cases is a limitation to the defence of volenti non fit injuria.
- It cannot be said that a man had consented to suffer the harm if he had acted under the compulsion of a legal duty or a moral duty.
I have always been against Glorifying Over Work and therefore, in the year 2021, I have decided to launch this campaign “Balancing Life”and talk about this wrong practice, that we have been following since last few years. I will be talking to and interviewing around 1 lakh people in the coming 2021 and publish their interview regarding their opinion on glamourising Over Work.
If you are interested in participating in the same, do let me know.
The copyright of this Article belongs exclusively to Ms. Aishwarya Sandeep. Reproduction of the same, without permission will amount to Copyright Infringement. Appropriate Legal Action under the Indian Laws will be taken.
If you would also like to contribute to my website, then do share your articles or poems at email@example.com
We also have a Facebook Group Restarter Moms for Mothers or Women who would like to rejoin their careers post a career break or women who are enterpreneurs.
We are also running a series Inspirational Women from January 2021 to March 31,2021, featuring around 1000 stories about Indian Women, who changed the world. #choosetochallenge